Financing system to fund projects selected from the Joint Call –

ERA-NET scheme/cofund

Mixed mode Model

The funding model that will be used in the [Name Initiative] call is the mixed mode model. No national/regional funding will cross the borders. The mixed mode – which was the most used model for ERA-NET Plus calls ( helps to ensure that selection decisions can follow the ranking list of the evaluated proposals (which was a ERANET Plus requirement) and that the participating funding countries/beneficiaries maintain their initial commitments. The final decision on which projects are to be funded in an ERA-NET scheme/cofund call will determine the amount of budgets to be spent by the funders, and this will influence also the EC contribution. The final EC contribution is open to variations and will, in principle, be determined at the end of the ERA-NET scheme/cofundactivity as the costs claimed by and granted to the projects can vary in their running time.

When a joint ranking list is arrived at, it is to be expected that funding gaps may appear due to the fact that funding agencies are being requested to fund a number of projects which have a total budgetary requirement beyond that which has been committed by the funding agency. In order to develop a scheme that can deliver on the requirements of an ERA-NET Plus programme, it has been agreed that the requested budgets of proposals admitted into Step 2 cannot exceed [number]times the total budget committed by the [Name Initiative]partners. This measure will help to avoid a huge oversubscription of proposals in relation to the budget.

To ensure that as many ranked projects as possible following the ranking list can be funded, a second measure (the “mixed mode funding model”) will be introduced by up to [number] % of the available EC contribution as a “balancing pot” for filling up the funding gaps caused by a lack of funds available to national/regional funding agencies. The remaining portion of the EC money will be distributed proportionally among the funding agencies based on the actual respective national/regional contributions. A commonly acceptable percentage for such a “balancing pot” is not more than [number] % of the available EC money. The final percentage has to be optimized based on the actual outcome.

To summarize the principles for distributing the funding:

  1. EC and national regulations for funding are applied
  2. Funding follows ranking list (top down)
  3. A mixed mode funding model is applied
  4. No national/regional funding will cross the borders
  5. Up to [number] % of the EC top-up is used as a balancing pot and the remaining portion will be proportionally distributed based on the actual national/regional contributions.

The financial commitments of the [number] participants are [amount] Euros as shown in Table [number]. However, it is possible that some funding participants wish to fund more projects in which case their contribution will be increased. The expected EC contribution is maximum [amount]Euros according to the final input of the MS and AC participating to the [Name project]consortium, as reported in Table [number].